Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As someone who never uses Apple devices, iMessage is the only true form of monopoly based control that Apple imposes. Apple's 30% costs are harsh, but it is not like Google or MSFT charge anything less.

Such cases always seem to reach a pre-determined conclusion, that has more to do with the political winds of the era, than true legal determinism.

Looking at the accusations from that lens:

1. Super Apps - I don't see how 'Apple doesn't share enough data with Chinese super apps' is going to fly 2024 America. It also has huge security and privacy impliciations. This accusation seems DOA.

2. Streaming games is tricky, but it isn't a big revenue stream. The outcome for this point appears immaterail to Apple stock.

3. iMessage - This is the big one. I see the whole case hinging on this point.

4. Smartwatches. Meh, Apple might add inter-op for apple smartwatches on android. I don't think this will lead to any users switching over or an actually pleasing experience.

5. Digital Wallets. This seems tacked on. Apps are PhonePe and PayTm work just fine on Apple and Android. I have never heard of anyone using a Digital Wallet that is not Apple pay, Google Pay or Samsung Pay. Are digital wallets a big revenue stream for Apple ?



> Google or MSFT charge anything less.

Google: true, BUT you can install and publish other app stores

MSFT: false, they charge 15% for apps and 12% for games (talking about the Microsoft Store)


You can't possibly equate the situation on windows or android with iOS. It's trivial to install an app from outside of the app stores on both, whereas it's entirely impossible on iOS.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: